<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title></title>
	<atom:link href="https://donaldgutstein.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://donaldgutstein.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2018 01:09:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Justin Trudeau’s grand bargain with Big Oil exposed in Donald Gutstein&#8217;s The Big Stall</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/justin-trudeaus-grand-bargain-with-big-oil-exposed-in-donald-gutsteins-the-big-stall/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/justin-trudeaus-grand-bargain-with-big-oil-exposed-in-donald-gutsteins-the-big-stall/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2018 00:22:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Big Stall]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=576</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Charlie Smith Georgia Straight November 14, 2018 &#160; Retired SFU communications professor Donald Gutstein is an old hand when it comes to dissecting the activities of neoliberal think tanks. His last two books—Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada and Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy—made a<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/justin-trudeaus-grand-bargain-with-big-oil-exposed-in-donald-gutsteins-the-big-stall/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Charlie Smith</p>
<p>Georgia Straight</p>
<p>November 14, 2018</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Retired SFU communications professor Donald Gutstein is an old hand when it comes to dissecting the activities of neoliberal think tanks.</p>
<p>His last two books—Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada and Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy—made a convincing case that there needs to be far more scrutiny of the funding of the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute and other organizations like it on both sides of the border.</p>
<p>So it shouldn’t come as a huge surprise that he has zeroed in on these public-policy hawkers in his new book, The Big Stall: How Big Oil and Think Tanks Are Blocking Action on Climate Change in Canada.</p>
<p>But in an interview in the Tangent Café on Commercial Drive, Gutstein conceded that when he began researching this topic two years ago, he had no idea of the extent to which they’ve influenced Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s policies in the wake of the 2015 Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>“I didn’t know too much about the subject when I started,” Gut­stein told the Straight over a bowl of soup. “Through the research and reading good stuff, gradually it all kind of emerged.”</p>
<p>The book opens with an examination of the National Energy Program, which was introduced by Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, after the Liberals were returned to power in 1980.</p>
<p>The NEP’s made-in-Canada oil-pricing formula was vehemently opposed by the Business Council on National Issues, which had been founded by resource-company CEOs in 1976 in response to a decision by Trudeau senior to introduce wage and price controls.</p>
<p>Once Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservatives came to power in 1984, a new energy minister from Vancouver, Pat Carney, was given a mandate to dismantle the NEP with the help of her top assistant, Harry Near, a former executive at Imperial Oil.</p>
<p>These changes were locked in by the free trade agreement of 1988, which, according to The Big Stall, “prohibited the imposition of discriminatory export taxes, something that the NEP used to promote domestic consumption”.</p>
<p>“I’ve had this sense all my life that business is generally doing whatever it needs to do to make profits in circumventing regulations,” Gutstein said.</p>
<p>According to him, the business community “went on the attack” against pioneering environmental author Rachel Carson even before her famous exposé of pesticides, Silent Spring, was released in 1962.</p>
<p>He also reports in his book that for years, Big Oil tried to sow doubt about climate change by copying some of the techniques that had been pioneered by public-relations practitioners trying to create uncertainty over whether or not cigarettes caused cancer.</p>
<p>In the 1970s, economists began to be hired by some environmental organizations, which then issued reports calculating the costs associated with environmental degradation. The problem with this approach, according to Gutstein, is that this “locked in the privatization of the environment” by putting a price on pollution.</p>
<p>From there, he said, it was only a natural step that carbon emissions would also be priced—something that Big Oil began welcoming around 2007 after it was clear that climate change was real and that corporations faced the prospect of hard-hitting regulations.</p>
<p>Writing in the Calgary Herald that year, the Canada West Foundation’s then president and CEO, Roger Gibbins, called for a climate-change policy to be rooted in the objectives of Western Canada. Gutstein writes that Gibbins’s proposal “would yoke climate change to the energy policy cart and be steered by a western Canadian driver, ensuring the combined policy formation would head in a direction desired by Big Oil”.</p>
<p>The following year, B.C. became the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a broad-based carbon tax.</p>
<p>“I think at the end of the day, [former B.C. premier] Gordon Campbell brought in the carbon tax because he was worried about the next election,” Gutstein said.</p>
<p>Even though Big Oil was prepared to accept a carbon tax as part of a national energy strategy, Gutstein said that then prime minister Stephen Harper refused to go along with the idea.</p>
<p>That didn’t stop Gibbins and others—including former Canadian Council of Chief Executives CEO Tom d’Aquino, Suncor Energy CEO Rick George, and former TransCanada PipeLines CEO Hal Kvisle—from meeting at the Fairmont Banff Springs Hotel to discuss the formulation of a North American energy strategy.</p>
<p>Two years later, this idea was advanced again at a meeting in Winnipeg, where leaders of 11 think tanks “agreed that a national dialogue on the role of energy in Canada’s environmental future was very much needed”.</p>
<p>One of the sponsors was Jim Carr, then president of the Business Council of Manitoba and later the natural resources minister and international trade diversification minister in Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government.</p>
<p>Gutstein reports in The Big Stall that six months after the Winnipeg Consensus was drafted, in 2009, heavy hitters involved in the energy industry and representatives of a small number of environmental organizations met in Banff.</p>
<p>Among them was the Pembina Institute’s Marlo Raynolds, who later became chief of staff to Environment Minister Catherine McKenna.</p>
<p>Another person at this event was Gerald Butts, president of the World Wildlife Fund Canada, who is now the senior political adviser to Trudeau. D’Aquino’s successor, former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley, was also present.</p>
<p>“But the biggest news from Banff was the presence of six representatives of a new player on the scene, the Energy Policy Institute of Canada (EPIC),” Gutstein writes. “This organization was incorporated the same month the Winnipeg Consensus was reached, October 2009. It had the backing of Canada’s largest fossil fuel companies, like Shell Canada, Imperial Oil, Canadian Natural Resources, and Suncor Energy, pipeline companies TransCanada Corporation and Enbridge, plus the major fossil fuel industry associations and especially the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.”</p>
<p>Gutstein told the Straight that he believes Manley was groomed for his position as president and CEO of the Business Council of Canada because he would be well positioned to endorse a carbon tax as part of a grand bargain that would also ensure a Liberal government would include pipeline projects in any national climate plan.</p>
<p>And Gutstein maintained that this market-based solution of a tax on pollution isn’t going to result in the types of emission reductions that could be obtained by tough government regulations, even though it would appear to be a reasonable compromise to the public. That’s what the book’s title, The Big Stall, refers to.</p>
<p>Gutstein, a practising Buddhist, said he wanted to document how all of this has unfolded under Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government.</p>
<p>“Basically, Big Oil is causing enormous suffering from a Buddhist point of view,” he said. “People have to know about it.”</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/justin-trudeaus-grand-bargain-with-big-oil-exposed-in-donald-gutsteins-the-big-stall/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Donald Trump versus &#8230;Wait, Bernie Who?</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/donald-trump-versus-wait-bernie-who/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/donald-trump-versus-wait-bernie-who/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2015 18:39:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=572</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They’re both running against party establishments for presidential nominations. They’re both equally popular with their party’s base. Yet Canadian media, like their American counterparts, have taken sides in the contest between democratic socialist Bernie Sanders and arch-capitalist Donald Trump. And that could serve Canadians even more poorly than it does Americans. It’s not simply the<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/donald-trump-versus-wait-bernie-who/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<article class="article__body main-col-container" data-dev-object-descrip="organisms/article/article__body" data-dev-status="IN-PROGRESS">
<div class="container-fluid clearfix ">
<p class="lead-in">They’re both running against party establishments for presidential nominations. They’re both equally popular with their party’s base. Yet Canadian media, like their American counterparts, have taken sides in the contest between democratic socialist Bernie Sanders and arch-capitalist Donald Trump.</p>
</div>
</article>
<p>And that could serve Canadians even more poorly than it does Americans.</p>
<p>It’s not simply the <a href="http://fair.org/home/two-candidates-surge-in-2016-polling-but-only-trump-not-sanders-fascinates-media/" target="_blank">difference</a> in total Canadian media coverage, in which Trump is mentioned roughly eight times more frequently than Sanders. It’s also how the coverage tells the story: how the two candidates are framed, the issues the media highlight, and the ones they neglect.  Trump and Sanders are both popular with voters.</p>
<p>At the beginning of 2015, Democratic hopeful and former first lady Hillary Clinton held over 60 per cent support of Democratic and Democratic-leaning registered voters &#8212; as she had through 2014. Sanders, the unknown independent senator from tiny Vermont, held less than four per cent &#8212; behind even the undeclared (then as now) Vice President Joe Biden. But Clinton’s advantage has slipped badly since then, mainly over her use of a private email server while Secretary of State. By the end of September, her support hovered just above 40 per cent. Sanders had passed the still-undeclared Biden to hit 25.8 per cent of Democratic voters.</p>
<aside class="ad-box ad-box--bigbox" data-dev-object-descrip="01-molecules/blocks/ad-box" data-dev-status="IN-PROGRESS"></aside>
<p>Meanwhile, Trump’s blazing early entry into the Republican race has settled back from over 30 per cent support among Republican and Republican-leaning registered voters to about 24 at the end of September.</p>
<p>Yet media coverage of the two candidates was vastly different.</p>
<article class="article__body main-col-container" data-dev-object-descrip="organisms/article/article__body" data-dev-status="IN-PROGRESS">
<div class="container-fluid clearfix ">
<p>  <strong>Scanning for Sanders</strong></p>
<p>That’s one problem for American voters. It’s another for Canadians, who stand to be impacted by whatever decision U.S. voters make but have different interests, and at times have shown quite different values.  Yet Canadian media mentions favour the casino, real-estate and reality-TV billionaire by an eight-to-one ratio.</p>
<p>Some have done better. The Globe and Mail has given the Donald only six times more coverage than Sanders. The National Post also was below average at seven-to-one, but had the most intense Trump coverage, mentioning him an astounding 141 times, or 20 per cent of all his mentions in Canadian print media. The reputedly more liberal Toronto Star was actually stingier, mentioning Sanders only once for every eight Trump mentions.</p>
<p>The Vancouver Sun had the worst record among print outlets, giving Trump ink 15 times for every time it acknowledged Sanders’ existence. One of the two mentions of Sanders in the Sun was in a letter complaining about the paper’s lack of Sanders’ coverage.</p>
<p>But the most unequal coverage was on-screen. CTV National News mentioned Trump 37 times over the past three months &#8212; and Sanders just once. CBC’s the National restrained its Trump coverage to 20 occasions, and managed a single Sanders mention.  Some of the difference can be explained by the fact the Republicans have held two public debates and the Democrats none. (The first is scheduled for Tuesday, Oct. 13.) Debates attract public interest and media attention.   There’s also the entertainment factor.</p>
<p>John Doyle, the Globe’s television critic, <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/television/john-doyle-trumps-allure-is-all-about-hyper-authenticity/article26499514/" target="_blank">argues</a> that politics blurred into reality-TV when John McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008, launching her and her family into a successful reality-TV career.</p>
<p>Now, says Doyle, Trump has taken the genre further: you don’t play the game to win, but to become the game. It’s entertainment in spades. Sanders, in contrast, bristles with policy ideas. He’s informative, not entertaining.</p>
<p>In refusing to cover a candidate whose speeches present a radical alternative to politics as usual, media in both countries can avoid confronting his ideas. Some of those might resonate strongly with Canadians facing their own election in less than two weeks.</p>
<p><strong>‘Undiplomatic yawps?’</strong></p>
<p>Among other things, Sanders proposes to break up huge financial institutions, revoke NAFTA and other trade deals that he claims drive down wages and lose millions of jobs, make tuition free at public colleges and universities, ensure the wealthy and corporations pay their fair share of taxes, and establish a universal childcare and pre-kindergarten program.</p>
<p>(Other Sanders ideas are well-established in Canada, like his commitments to get unlimited money out of politics and to guarantee health care as a right of citizenship with a single-payer insurance system.)</p>
<aside class="ad-box ad-box--bigbox" data-dev-object-descrip="01-molecules/blocks/ad-box" data-dev-status="IN-PROGRESS">
<div id="ad-bigboxlower" class="advertisement"> Trump’s program, on the other hand, is to “Make America great again.” He says he’ll do this by protecting Americans’ right “to keep and bear arms”; building a wall along the Mexican border (and getting Mexico to pay for it); and deporting aliens and illegal immigrants, including any Syrian refugees the country accepts under President Obama.</div>
</aside>
<p>  A lifelong democratic socialist presents detailed, clear ideas for making his country a better place for its citizens. A consummate performer dispenses caustic put-downs. How have Canadian media &#8212; those that pay any attention at all to Sanders &#8212; treated the two?</p>
<p>Allen Abel, Washington-based correspondent for Maclean’s, resorted to innuendo and name-calling. He calls the American “a preening, brilliant, motor-mouthed billionaire,” and “the country’s paramount self-promoter,” but he also found “a solid majority of voters &#8212; registered Democrats included &#8212; in Trump’s corner, or at least willing to consider voting for him.” He lets racist and sexist comments and Trump’s personal attacks on opponents go as merely “undiplomatic yawps.”</p>
<p>Sanders, Abel slights as a “former pamphleteer, propagandist and mayor of Burlington, Vt.,” as though the last were some mildly criminal act. He frames Sanders as an “angry upstart” (whose political career began in the 1970s), who gives “sweat-drenched harangues&#8230; fervent, flushed and fanatic on the topics of corporate wealth and public health.”</p>
<p>Abel seems particularly insulted by Sanders’ attacks on billionaires, counting 13 “scathing” mentions in one speech. Sanders thinks it’s especially wrong for the Walton family to own more wealth than the bottom 40 per cent of all Americans. (Abel’s employer, the Rogers family, has roughly twice Trump’s fortune.)</p>
<p>The Globe and Mail did a better job, twice comparing Trump and Sanders, once as “radicals of the right and left” and another time as “upstarts.” The reports did mention some policy differences.   National Post columnist John Robson claims that Hillary Clinton has a lock on the Democratic nomination despite what he also insists are “media efforts to hype openly socialist Bernie Sanders” (oddly, by giving him almost no coverage). His colleague Barbara Kay calls Sanders a “communist.”</p>
<p>Curiously enough, the Post’s editorial board seems to like Sanders, not because of his policies &#8212; “name an item on liberal America’s wish list and it is likely to be there” &#8212; but because he promises to “spoil the Hillary Clinton coronation.”</p>
<p><strong>Ideas find a way</strong></p>
<p>So if Trump has money, fame and the media’s adoring attention, just how is the overlooked and reviled Sanders gaining so much support?</p>
<p>One answer may be provided by Silicon Valley web optimization company Instart Logic, which has <a href="http://www.contracostatimes.com/breaking-news/ci_28879756/political-blotter-bernie-sanders-has-most-effective-digital" target="_blank">suggested</a> that Sanders is running the “most digitally effective campaign” of all candidates in either party, bypassing traditional media coverage.   But there’s another reason for declining Clinton support.</p>
<p>Like the National Post’s editorial board, many U.S. Democrats see Sanders as slowing down the Clinton juggernaut. But while the Post dislikes Clinton for not being right-wing enough &#8212; coming out in opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, for instance &#8212; Sanders’ supporters loathe her (and her husband’s) record of cozying up to Wall Street.</p>
<p>They see in Sanders’ values what they believe is truly needed to bring America back to a healthier, more democratic and egalitarian society.</p>
<p>Globe and Mail columnist Marcus Gee once compared Trump, not with Sanders, but to former Toronto mayor Rob Ford. For many voters, he said, “the rants unleashed by these raging bulls and against a privileged political class and overfed, inefficient governments ring true. In a plastic political world, they are desperate for something real. As long as they feel that way, they are going to be tempted, in Mr. Ford’s immortal phrase, to ‘go snake’ and elect someone who promises to walk into the dinner party and smash a few plates.”</p>
<p>But smashing a few plates does nothing to unmake a brutal neoliberalism or build a better society. That takes ideas, the kind that Bernie Sanders offers, but that the traditional media in Canada and the U.S. simply refuse to tell us about. <img class="icoft" src="https://thetyee.ca/ui/img/ico_fishie.png" alt=" [Tyee] " width="12" height="16" /></p>
</div>
</article>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/donald-trump-versus-wait-bernie-who/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CCPA Monitor &#8211; Neoliberal Bedfellows</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/ccpa-monitor-neoliberal-bedfellows/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/ccpa-monitor-neoliberal-bedfellows/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2014 06:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=542</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada By Donald Gutstein Lorimer (September 2014), 288 pages, $22.95. Reviewed by Frank Bayerl While it may sometimes seem the Harper government’s policies are an ad hoc mixture of right-wing populism, poll- driven opportunism and economic austerity (with a dash of nationalism and military<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/ccpa-monitor-neoliberal-bedfellows/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada By Donald Gutstein</p>
<p>Lorimer (September 2014), 288 pages, $22.95. Reviewed by Frank Bayerl</p>
<p>While it may sometimes seem the Harper government’s policies are an ad hoc mixture of right-wing populism, poll- driven opportunism and economic austerity (with a dash of nationalism and military swagger thrown in), a new book by Donald Gutstein argues that Conservative policy development is more calculated than that, and heavily influenced by the work of think tanks.</p>
<p>The shared objective is neoliberalism, the political philosophy that sees economic freedom as the highest good—over and above political freedom. To right-wing think tanks, the role of government is simply to bring about the conditions that will allow markets to flourish, unhindered by regulatory and social constraints. In Harperism, Gutstein offers a clearly written explanation of how this political philosophy continues to guide the actions of the current government.</p>
<p>Achieving a free-market utopia first requires a change in the climate of ideas, and this is where think tanks play their role. Gutstein, an adjunct professor at Simon Fraser University’s school of communications, takes the reader through a brief history of the post–Second World War founding of neoliberal thinks tanks in Britain and North America, under the influence of such key thinkers as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.</p>
<p>Hayek and Friedman were co- founders of the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947, whose ideas can be directly linked to the victory of Margaret Thatcher in 1979. Other influential neoliberal think tanks include the London- based Institute of Economic Affairs, founded in the 1950s, and the American Heritage Foundation, dating to 1973. A publication by the latter, A Mandate for Leadership, became a blueprint for the Reagan administration when it came to power in 1981.</p>
<p>Here in Canada, the Macdonald- Laurier Institute has come to occupy a similar position of influence within the Harper government. Despite being established as late as 2009, the institute has already had an impact on government policy in the areas of “tough on crime” legislation, immigration policy, and securing Aboriginal support for the Northern Gateway pipeline. The institute also endorsed the idea of refocusing the Canadian Museum of History (formerly the Canadian Museum of Civilization) so that it featured prime ministers and wars instead of human civilization in a broad sense.</p>
<p>Harperism reveals the close and often hidden connections between Canada’s right-wing think tanks (e.g. the Fraser and C.D. Howe institutes) and such neutral-sounding institutions as the University of Calgary’s School for Public Policy, which is actually a neoliberal think tank embedded in a university, and Sustainable Prosperity, a project of the University of Ottawa’s faculty of law that counts Preston Manning on its board of advisers.</p>
<p>The Fraser Institute is perhaps best known for its annual world economic freedom index. The fact that Hong Kong has consistently held first place in this index tells us much about the kind of society the institute desires. (Hong Kong also leads the developed world in income inequality and has been much in the news lately for its notable lack of democratic freedoms.)</p>
<p>As Gutstein explains, a neoliberal propaganda system has now become established in Canada. Think tanks transform the ideas of Hayek, Freidman and their followers into research.</p>
<p>“Sympathetic academics provide research studies compatible with the think tank’s goals; corporate executives and the foundations of wealthy businessmen finance the research; and sympathetic media owners and commentators disseminate the research to target audiences. It’s a package deal.”</p>
<p>Gutstein devotes a series of chapters to illustrating how this system operates to advance various policy objectives, including weakening labour unions, encouraging the privatization of land on First Nations reserves, eviscerating environmental protections in the interest of giving a free hand to industry, preventing the free circulation of scientific knowledge by muzzling government scientists, denying income inequality by muddying the statistical waters, and promoting a narrow nationalism by emphasizing Canada’s history as a warrior nation rather than its peacekeeping tradition.</p>
<p>He offers two especially poignant examples of co-operative reframing exercises in the environmental field: one in which “dirty oil” becomes “ethical oil,” the other, spearheaded by former natural resources minister Joe Oliver, where environmentalists are transformed into foreign-funded radicals far outside the mainstream.</p>
<p>In four months, “Ethical Oil” went from being the title of a book by Ezra Levant to an official government talking point. Support for the deeply flawed concept came first from newspapers of the Sun Media chain, which employs Levant and published excerpts from his book, giving it national exposure. This was followed by a column by the author attacking Greenpeace, then more favourable coverage, also in Sun papers, of a speech he gave to the Economic Club of Canada.</p>
<p>Ethical Oil—the book but more importantly the talking point—was given further exposure in the National Post. Levant also appeared at least four times on CBC radio and television, and was offered prominent appearances at The Vancouver Club and Fraser Institute events.</p>
<p>Conservative senators Nicole Eaton and Linda Frum soon jumped on the ethical oil bandwagon in a Senate inquiry into the oil sands, and Levant later testified on the subject before the House of Commons standing committee on natural resources. Soon the Harper government took full ownership of the dubious concept, using it in the Prime Minister’s speeches, and otherwise making “ethical oil” the linguistic weapon of choice for avoiding discussions about Canada’s dirty oil project.</p>
<p>Gutstein provides equally clear analysis of the Harper government’s attempts to limit dissemination of scientific knowledge and research by cancelling the long-form census, abolishing the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, the First Nations Statistical Institute and the National Council on Welfare, and severely cutting funding to departments with an environmental mandate.</p>
<p>With a truly spectacular misunderstanding of the purpose of independent research, the Prime Minister is said to have asked a reporter on one occasion why his government should fund these agencies when they offer solutions that differ from government policy.</p>
<p>Harperism makes for dispiriting reading and the author sees a difficult path ahead for progressives. The changes already in place will make it hard to reverse many Conservative policies, he says, adding that the effort must still be made to imagine a new role for government that doesn’t treat everything as an offshoot of the economy.</p>
<p>Gutstein is a bit vague as to how this is to be accomplished, but certainly it must involve changing the conversation in as profound a way as Hayek, Friedman and friends did half a century ago.</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/ccpa-monitor-neoliberal-bedfellows/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Briarpatch &#8211; Think Tanks, Media and the Conventional Wisdom</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/briarpatch-think-tanks-media-and-the-conventional-wisdom/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/briarpatch-think-tanks-media-and-the-conventional-wisdom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2014 05:40:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=540</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Harperism: Think Tanks, Media, and the Conventional Wisdom Book review by Gerard Di Trolio • Nov 14, 2014 • Politics James Lorimer &#38; Company Ltd, 2014. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan so transformed the politics of the countries they governed that new political orders were named after them. In Harperism, Donald Gutstein attempts to make<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/briarpatch-think-tanks-media-and-the-conventional-wisdom/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Harperism: Think Tanks, Media, and the Conventional Wisdom<br />
Book review<br />
by Gerard Di Trolio • Nov 14, 2014 • Politics<br />
James Lorimer &amp; Company Ltd, 2014.</p>
<p>Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan so transformed the politics of the countries they governed that new political orders were named after them. In Harperism, Donald Gutstein attempts to make the same case for current Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper.</p>
<p>For Gutstein, Harper’s rise marks a culminating point in the successful bid of neoliberal think tanks and right-wing media personalities to define the conventional wisdom in Canada. Harper’s success is a product of neoliberal politics, then, and not their source. Following thinkers like David Harvey, Gutstein gives a helpful account of the emergence of neoliberalism in the postwar world, charting the rise of intellectuals like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman and their role in creating the Mont Pelerin Society, which laid the intellectual foundations for a new era of free market ideology.</p>
<p>Gutstein is careful to dispel the myth that neoliberal governance means a small state. It’s just that the neoliberal state is committed to creating new markets and ensuring their success, no matter the cost, in place of providing social services. Gutstein understands that neoliberalism had penetrated the thinking of Canada’s political class long before Harper’s ascension to the leadership of the Conservative Party.</p>
<p>Far too many people in the anti-Harper camp lay all of Canada’s problems at Harper’s feet, avoiding a more systemic and historical understanding of how we got to this place. Gutstein highlights the Mulroney government’s push for free trade, the deep cuts of the Chretien years, and how even the NDP has been largely unwilling to challenge the neoliberal framework. Harper and his ideological comrades simply come off as the most committed and ruthless of the modern neoliberal political class.</p>
<p>Gutstein’s chronicling of the workings of Harper and his allies in think tanks and the media is the real strength of Harperism. Gutstein charts how the rise of think tanks like B.C.’s Fraser Institute emerged across the West in a strategic assault on social democracy. And think tanks would mean little without accomplices in media and journalism. Hayek understood that there needed to be a class of “professional secondhand dealers in ideas” to communicate neoliberal ideas to the public in an accessible way. Slowly but surely this renewed free market ideology was disseminated through major media outlets.</p>
<p>Far from an indictment of a lone politician, Harperism lays out the incestuous neoliberal nexus of Canadian think tanks, media, and governance.</p>
<p>Gutstein’s fourth chapter, “Liberate Dead Capital on First Nations Reserves,” shows how Tom Flanagan and co-authors Christopher Alcantra and André Le Dressay’s 2010 book Beyond The Indian Act: Restoring Aboriginal Property Rights was successfully pushed by neoliberal think tanks like the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. The book’s reception and its thesis – that creating private land title on reserves would usher First Nations into the modern capitalist economy and allow them to lift themselves from poverty – was soon being discussed across major media outlets.</p>
<p>Beyond the Indian Act draws heavily on economist Hernando de Soto’s work in creating land title for Indigenous peasants in Peru. Following the book’s publication, Canadian think tanks and foundations played host to numerous events with Soto, promoting private ownership (fee simple title) as the answer to First Nations poverty. Soon, government officials and MPs were signaling their support to reforming the Indian Act to allow land title. The federal government’s reforms to the Indian Act were derailed in the short term by the massive groundswell of Indigenous activism that became known as Idle No More.</p>
<p>Gutstein also shows how the discussion around right-wing polemicist Ezra Levant’s book Ethical Oil followed a similar path of embrace from think tanks to reviews in the media to official government talking points.</p>
<p>Gutstein’s documentation of the neoliberal idea pipeline leaves the reader with a horrible impression of what passes for journalism in Canada. Gutstein shows how columnists like Andrew Coyne and Terence Corcoran are hopelessly compromised by their membership in various neoliberal think tanks and foundations – ties never disclosed when they write about policy issues. And the media’s role as neoliberal mouthpiece isn’t confined to publications that wear their ideology on their sleeve like the National Post and the Sun newspapers (recently bought by Postmedia). The Canadian Press, Globe and Mail, and even the liberal Toronto Star act as conduits that keep policy debate within neoliberal parameters.</p>
<p>Do all of the examples contained in Gutstein’s book make the case for something we can name Harperism? There’s a revolving door of individuals who all pass through think tanks, media, and government that have supported Harper’s policies and the Conservative Party itself. The case for Harperism is strong.</p>
<p>Gutstein also shows how an incremental approach has been a major factor in Harper’s governance. A cut here, a new policy there – the monolith emerges incrementally. Take raising Old Age Security eligibility to age 67. It doesn’t affect Canadians immediately, as they reckon with the immediate challenges of a discouraging job market, runaway housing costs, and private debt. Likewise, few Canadians feel the immediate effects of Harper’s climate crisis obstructionism.</p>
<p>It took the Reform and Conservative parties many years to shake off the public fears that they would introduce a two-tier healthcare system. But sure enough, we see Harper reducing federal health care dollars over the next several years at a time when many provinces are struggling to close their budget deficits. This resulting crisis may only come to a head after Harper has left office.</p>
<p>Given the tight policy window Harper has created, introduction of private care into Canada’s healthcare system, like the use of public-private partnerships throughout the public sector, can seem a fait accompli. Meanwhile, Gutstein sees a Liberal Party that seeks to distinguish itself from Harper in style, through the sheer force of Justin Trudeau’s personality, but not in substance, while Thomas Mulcair’s NDP seems as reticent to raise taxes on the rich as any dedicated neoliberal. Canadians should recall that when Margaret Thatcher was once asked what her greatest accomplishment was, she replied, “New Labour.”</p>
<p>As Gutstein notes in his conclusion:</p>
<p>“The Institute of Economic Affairs, the first neoliberal think tank, established the guiding principle for all its publications: make no concessions to existing political or economic realities, but stick to neoliberal doctrine. Neoliberalism’s enemies must do the same if they ever hope to forge the ideas that will eventually replace neoliberalism. Otherwise, Harperism will remain intact for years to come.”</p>
<p>A key weakness in Harperism is Gutstein’s analysis of neoliberalism as a movement. He notes that funding to promote neoliberal ideas comes from wealthy capitalists like Canada’s Thompson family. But Gutstein still portrays the neoliberal offensive of the last 40 years as a movement of right-wing Jacobins responding to the economic crisis of the 1970s.</p>
<p>There is no explicit talk of neoliberalism as a broader class offensive. For neoliberalism isn’t just a reflection of the desires of right-wing ideologues but of a capitalist ruling class that has thrown off the very modest and incomplete regimes of regulation and redistribution found in Western economies after World War Two.</p>
<p>It is neoliberalism’s success that shows the limits of democracy within a capitalist system. And that’s an issue that Gutstein does not address.</p>
<p>Gerard Di Trolio is a freelance writer and an editor at rankandfile.ca. He lives in Toronto.</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/briarpatch-think-tanks-media-and-the-conventional-wisdom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Author Donald Gutstein reveals extent of Stephen Harper revolution in new book Harperism</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/gutstein-reveals-extent-of-stephen-harper-revolution/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/gutstein-reveals-extent-of-stephen-harper-revolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:50:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonny Miller]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=512</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Charlie Smith at 10:34 am, on Oct 1, 2014 Georgia Straight &#160; Burnaby author Donald Gutstein has spent the past 40 years tracking the rise of neoliberal ideology. Over lunch at Tangent Café on Commercial Drive, the adjunct SFU communication professor says that after all these years, many people are confused about what this<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/gutstein-reveals-extent-of-stephen-harper-revolution/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="print-content">
<div class="ds-1col node node-article odd full-node view-mode-print clearfix ">
<div class="field field-name-gs-helper-author-date"><small>by <span class="name"><a class="username" title="View user profile." xml:lang="" href="http://www.straight.com/users/charlie-smith">Charlie Smith</a></span> at <span class="time">10:34 am, on Oct 1, 2014</span></small></div>
<div class="field field-name-gs-helper-author-date"><small>Georgia Straight</small></div>
<div class="field field-name-gs-helper-featured-media">&nbsp;</div>
<div class="field field-name-body">
<p>Burnaby author Donald Gutstein has spent the past 40 years tracking the rise of neoliberal ideology. Over lunch at Tangent Café on Commercial Drive, the adjunct SFU communication professor says that after all these years, many people are confused about what this term means because it’s rarely defined. So he decided to write a book about it, using Prime Minister Stephen Harper as a case study.</p>
<p>In <em>Harperism: How Stephen Har­per and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada</em> (<a href="http://www.lorimer.ca/adults/Book/2698/Harperism.html">James Lorimer &amp; Company Ltd.</a>), Gutstein makes the case that neoliberalism is far more sinister than simply having a desire for smaller government. A central tenet of his new book is that Harper is undermining democracy by marshalling the power of government to create and enforce markets where they’ve never existed before.</p>
<p>“He’s gradually moving the country from one that’s based on democracy to one that’s based on the market, which means that the decisions are not made by our duly elected representatives through the laws that they pass and the regulations that they enact,” Gutstein says.</p>
<p>When asked for an example, the bearded intellectual mentions the<a href="http://www.straight.com/news/363841/temporary-foreign-workers-program-leading-apartheid-says-professor"> temporary-foreign-worker program</a>. That’s because it advances the notion that employers, and not the government, should determine who immigrates to Canada under a market-based system.</p>
<p>Another example is <a href="http://perc.org/about-perc/what-fme">free-market environmentalism</a>, which was developed by the neoliberal Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco and has been embraced by the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute.</p>
<p>According to Gutstein, the objective of FME is to have environmental issues addressed by markets rather than through government regulation.</p>
<p>This is accomplished by placing a dollar value on environmental assets, which then can be leveraged for loans or securitized and sold off by investment dealers. As an example, TD Economics <a href="http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/UrbanForests.pdf">recently estimated</a> that the Lower Mainland’s urban forests are worth $224 million in annual economic and environmental benefits and have a replacement value of $35 billion.</p>
<p>“So it’s a step in that direction,” Gutstein says. “If you can put a value on it, then someone can own it.”</p>
<p>Now in his mid-70s, the trim academic argues that Harper’s policies are rooted in the neoliberal belief that “economic freedom” trumps other societal objectives. The Fraser Institute defines the “four cornerstones” of economic freedom as “personal choice, voluntary exchange coordinated by markets, freedom to enter and compete in markets, and protection of persons and their property from aggression by others”.</p>
<p>With astonishing intellectual dexterity, Gutstein demonstrates in his book how Harper’s overarching mission to promote economic freedom through the imposition of markets is reflected in Conservative government policies.</p>
<p>This explains the zealous desire to dismantle environmental regulations, muzzle government scientists, and scrap the long-form census. The faith in markets also underlies Harper’s blindness to rising income inequality and his eagerness to undermine the Canadian Wheat Board.</p>
<p>In addition, it provides a theoretical framework behind efforts to persuade First Nations to abandon collective ownership of their land in favour of a fee-simple system. Neoliberal ideology also manifests itself in Harper galloping around the world to sign free-trade agreements, which limit municipal and provincial governments’ ability to introduce regulations or procure locally produced goods and services.</p>
<p>Gutstein argues that Harper is radically re-forming the Canadian state but it’s largely gone unnoticed because he’s doing it gradually and with considerable stealth.</p>
<p>“When you take an incremental approach, it doesn’t look like a revolution,” the professor says with a smile.</p>
<p>The neoliberals’ ultimate prize would be to enshrine property rights in the Constitution. Gutstein shows how this, too, is being done incrementally by focusing on Section 43 of the <a href="http://www.solon.org/Constitutions/Canada/English/ca_1982.html">Constitution Act, 1982</a>, as a means to get this implemented in Ontario first. From there, it could spread across the country.</p>
<p>If that happens, it will become more difficult for governments to introduce environmental regulations because companies could launch court challenges, arguing that their charter rights are being violated.</p>
<p>“Neoliberalism is a utopian project,” Gutstein explains. “It will never be totally accomplished. That’s why there’s always more to do.”</p>
<p>So where did neoliberal ideology come from? Gutstein’s book highlights the importance of the little-known <a href="https://www.montpelerin.org/montpelerin/index.html">Mont Pelerin Society</a>, which was created in 1947 by neoliberal economists <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/business-19706272">Friedrich Hayek</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_Friedman">Milton Friedman</a>. They had a long-term goal of disseminating ideas to counter social democracy by relying on what Hayek called “second-hand dealers”.</p>
<p>Second-hand dealers include various newspaper columnists and editorial writers across Canada who parrot reports by neoliberal think tanks such as the Fraser Institute, Macdonald-Laurier Institute, Frontier Centre for Public Policy, Montreal Economic Institute, and Atlantic Institute for Market Studies. Second-hand dealers can also be teachers, church ministers, artists, playwrights, and filmmakers—anybody who can put neoliberal ideas in a form that can be understood by audiences.</p>
<p>“They’re crucial,” Gutstein emphasizes. “Nothing would happen without them.”</p>
<p>In Gutstein’s eyes, another second-hand dealer was novelist <a href="http://www.michaelcrichton.net/">Michael Crichton</a>, a climate-change denier whose <em>State of Fear</em> characterized environmentalists as mass murderers.</p>
<p>In <em>Harperism</em>, Gutstein shows how the creation of the Mont Pelerin Society and its associated neoliberal think tanks led directly to the rise of British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, U.S. president Ronald Reagan, and Harper.</p>
<p>“Harper was introduced to Hayek as a graduate student at the University of Calgary in the 1980s; Hayek seems to have guided Harper’s thinking since then,” Gutstein writes in the book. “The debt Harper owes these neoliberals, their ideology, and their network of affiliated think tanks is just as enormous as that owed by Thatcher and Reagan.”</p>
<p>Gutstein emphasizes that Hayek, who died in 1992, and Friedman, who died in 2006, didn’t invent this approach to changing the political climate. Rather, he argues that they were merely copying Britain’s <a href="http://www.fabians.org.uk/">Fabian Society</a>, which used similar methods to advance socialism and the welfare state.</p>
<p>In Canada, two of the most influential Mont Pelerin Society members have been the Fraser Institute’s former executive director,<a href="https://www.fraserinstitute.org/author.aspx?id=15364&amp;txID=3266"> Michael Walker</a>, and <a href="http://www.brianleecrowley.com/">Brian Lee Crowley</a>, founder of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and former president of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies.</p>
<p>When asked how important Walker has been in the evolution of the Canadian state, Gutstein simply replied, &#8220;Really important.&#8221;</p>
<p>For a while, Crowley was a senior economic adviser to the federal finance ministry.</p>
<p>Crowley’s <em>Fearful Symmetry: The Fall and Rise of Canada’s Founding Values</em> (Key Porter Books, 2009) describes how “traditional” Canadian values, such as a commitment to family and a solid work ethic, were undermined by the baby-boom generation and the rise of Quebec’s separatist movement. But he claimed that this is changing.</p>
<p>“Already with our early welfare reform in the nineties, we began to shift away from an unhelpful focus on ‘poverty-as-victimization’ to seeing poverty as much more an outcome of the behaviours of the poor themselves,” Crowley wrote. “In this we are rejoining the mainstream of thinking in the Western world. We see poverty, in other words, more and more as a matter of character.”</p>
<p>Postmedia columnist and weekly CBC TV commentator <a href="http://andrewcoyne.com/">Andrew Coyne</a> attended the London School of Economics with Crowley, an ardent Hayekian. Coyne has called <em>Fearful Symmetry</em> a “profoundly important book” for its analysis of the impact of a shrinking labour market.</p>
<p>“It will mean cutting taxes, to provide incentives,” Coyne wrote in the introduction to <em>Fearful Symmetry</em>. “It will mean opening ourselves further to international trade, to make better use of the productive talents of workers in other countries. It will mean having more children, which will in turn require policies that buttress the family unit—or at least do not discourage it.”</p>
<p>Gutstein writes that Coyne is much more than a second-hand dealer of Hayekian ideas because he “occupies the interface between think tanks and media, crucial territory in the neoliberal war of ideas”. This is why Coyne receives far more attention than any other Canadian journalist in <em>Harperism</em>.</p>
<p>“As of this writing in mid-2014, a tightly knit, smoothly operating neo-liberal propaganda system has been installed in Canada,” Gutstein claims in his book.</p>
<p>To further their success, neoliberals have paid great attention to the use of language in selling their ideas to the public. Gutstein notes in his book that Conservative politicians repeatedly claim to support “sound science” and condemn “radical environmentalists” even as they’re preventing government scientists from being interviewed by reporters.</p>
<p>Gutstein explains that Harperism really has three key ingredients. First and foremost, it promotes neoliberalism. Secondly, it’s gradual. And thirdly, it involves fundamentally redefining Canada as a great nation with a glorious military past. He argues that this is why the Canadian citizenship guide was rewritten.</p>
<p>“The word ‘war’ doesn’t appear in the Chrétien-Martin guide, but is used fifty-five times in the Harper version,” Gutstein writes.</p>
<p>If neoliberal ideologues have an Achilles’ heel, Gutstein says, it’s their refusal to acknowledge how their policies increase inequality. Citing statistics from the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Gutstein points out that income inequality is at its highest point in 50 years among the 34 most developed countries in the world.</p>
<p>According to the OECD, increased income inequality is linked to declining union membership, minimum wages not rising with inflation, lower employment standards, and reduced length and generosity of unemployment benefits. However, Gutstein notes that Hayek associated income inequality with economic progress.</p>
<p>“Consequently, Hayek asserts, we must live with inequality because government intervention to reduce it will make things worse,” Gutstein writes.</p>
<p>Not everyone agrees with Hayek on this issue. British epidemiologists <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_G._Wilkinson">Richard Wilkinson</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kate_Pickett">Kate Pickett</a> demonstrated in <em>The Spirit Level: Why Equality Is Better for Everyone</em> (Bloomsbury Publishing PLC, 2010) that income inequality generates worse health outcomes for all of society, including the rich. Moreover, their data showed that higher inequality reduces everyone’s life expectancy.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Hong Kong consistently ranks first in the Fraser Institute’s annual ranking of economic freedom, even though it has the greatest income inequality in the developed world.</p>
<p>Gutstein reports in <em>Harperism</em> that the Fraser Institute’s <a href="http://www.fraserinstitute.org/author.aspx?id=15049&amp;txID=2951">Fred McMahon</a> condemned the Hong Kong government for introducing a minimum wage because it “interferes with voluntary arrangements between hirers and employees”.</p>
<p>McMahon said this even though the employers were often billionaires. His comment reflected Hayek’s general opposition to central planning.</p>
<p>When asked why neoliberals have these views, Gutstein says that it’s rooted in their belief that governments will always screw things up and only the market can be trusted to make the right decisions.</p>
<p>“I wouldn’t say it’s a cult,” he says. “It’s a brotherhood. It’s a worldwide network.”</p>
<p><strong>Donald Gutstein will hold a book launch for <em>Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada</em> at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday (October 8) at SFU Harbour Centre.</strong></p>
</div>
<div class="field field-name-field-footer"><em>Follow Charlie Smith on Twitter <a href="https://twitter.com/csmithstraight">@csmithstraight</a>.</em></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="print-footer"></div>
<hr class="print-hr" />
<div class="print-source_url"><small><strong>Source URL:</strong> <a href="http://www.straight.com/life/741201/author-donald-gutstein-reveals-extent-stephen-harper-revolution-new-book-harperism">http://www.straight.com/life/741201/author-donald-gutstein-reveals-extent-stephen-harper-revolution-new-book-harperism</a></small></p>
</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/gutstein-reveals-extent-of-stephen-harper-revolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>National Newswatch: Canadians Need to Take Their Country Back Before It’s Gone</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/national-newswatch-canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/national-newswatch-canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2014 17:38:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=529</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Frances Russell — National Newswatch — Oct 22 2014 http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2014/10/22/canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/#.VFJtFhY64U8 A man and his economic dogma is quietly – and steadily – transforming Canada profoundly, perhaps beyond repair as well as recognition. From glorifying past wars to ongoing assaults on parliament, the federal public service, science and the environment and from a thinly veiled<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/national-newswatch-canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Frances Russell — National Newswatch — Oct 22 2014<br />
<a href="http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2014/10/22/canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/#.VFJtFhY64U8">http://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2014/10/22/canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/#.VFJtFhY64U8</a></p>
<p>A man and his economic dogma is quietly – and steadily – transforming Canada profoundly, perhaps beyond repair as well as recognition.</p>
<p>From glorifying past wars to ongoing assaults on parliament, the federal public service, science and the environment and from a thinly veiled war on the poor to endless gifting to the rich and the ultra-rich, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s tenure in office has largely been a route map to a nation where only the rich and the Right have any genuine claim to full human rights and citizenship.</p>
<p>Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think Tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada by Donald Gutstein, an adjunct professor in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University and co-director of News Watch Canada, is a stinging wake-up call to Canadians to the social and economic revolution wreaked on their country in less than a decade.</p>
<p>All indications point to the Harper government’s determination to push Canada back to the pre-World War Two era of clear class divisions, widespread economic hardship and vestigial social programs.</p>
<p>Pivotal to achieving this almost total recasting of Canadian society away from its post-war social democratic era of national social programs, pursuit of equity and equality, social justice and human rights, has been an ever-growing phalanx of increasingly well-endowed think tanks.</p>
<p>Their names are legion everywhere in Canada’s mainstream media. Their boards and staff are daily commonplace faces and voices in the business press, radio, television and print.</p>
<p>Here are the most prominent: the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (AIM), the Macdonald-Laurier Institute (MLI), the Mount Pelerin Society (MPS), the Fraser Institute (Fraser), the Manning Centre for Building Democracy (Manning), the Montreal Economic Institute (MEI), the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), the Frontier Centre and the Institute for Liberty and Democracy. (ILD).</p>
<p>With only a few exceptions – the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Council of Canadians, the Broadbent Institute – they are all neo-liberal mouthpieces, ceaseless and tireless advocates for ever-smaller government, ever-lower taxes and ever-freer trade.</p>
<p>Continuously and richly endowed by Canada’s scions of Big Business, these pressure groups are the wind in Harperisms’ sails. Endowed with multi-million-dollar bank accounts from corporate sponsors, they grind out a steady stream of editorials and op-ed pieces routinely published in most if not all of the mainstream media. Like a Greek chorus, they endlessly repeat the praises of ever-smaller government and ever-lower taxes.</p>
<p>It’s 24/7 public brainwashing.</p>
<p>These polemicists rage ceaselessly – and almost always successfully – against virtually every aspect of the post-war social welfare state, from unions and free collective bargaining to free education and from medicare, hospital insurance and adequate pensions to child care and equalization between have and have-not provinces, to name a few of the casualties so far.</p>
<p>Of course, the business community is always happy to put its shoulder to the wheel in the service of ever-lower taxes and ever-smaller government, not just to save money, but to speed up quick and easy corporate decision-making.</p>
<p>Gutstein states that there is “a direct link from Mont Pelerin to Harper via the IEA. The Fraser Institute and its allied think tanks today spend upwards of $26 million a year to promote neo-liberal ideas in Canada alone.”</p>
<p>One of Stephen Harper’s first acts upon becoming leader of the brand-new Canadian Conservative party was to remove its historic title as Progressive Conservative, reducing it to Conservative party, period. Next on his agenda was to slash the Goods and Services Tax from seven per cent to five per cent, denying the government $14 billion a year, every year, in foregone revenue into perpetuity.</p>
<p>Everyone knows the ever-watchful think tank chorus would be singing at High-C should any future government ever dare to replace that budget shortfall – ever.</p>
<p>When faced with his first major economic challenge – a yawning budget hole due to that deliberate downsizing of government immediately followed by the 2007-8 world financial meltdown – Harper didn’t look to raise taxes. Instead, he pumped up the austerity, seized yet another opportunity to cut programs and services and laid off 30,000 government workers.</p>
<p>That’s not surprising. Who can forget the prime minister’s frank confession to Eric Reguly of The Globe and Mail in 2009 that “You know, there’s two schools in economics on this, one is that there are some good taxes and the other is that no taxes are good taxes. I’m in the latter category. I don’t believe any taxes are good taxes.”</p>
<p>Ever since, the public service makes an annual march to place its collective head on the Harper Guillotine’s chopping block so that an ongoing stream of national programs and services – services that were once considered vital to the health, welfare, safety and prosperity of Canadians – can be lopped off with just one-line mentions in the Harper government’s annual 1,000-plus-page omnibus budget bill.</p>
<p>That novel development in modern parliamentary democracy, courtesy of Harper &amp; Co., is so much faster and politically safer – and so much less bother – than actually having to kill off the nation’s vital programs and services one by one while your electorate watches.</p>
<p>Indeed, under the eager guidance of uber-fiscal hawk Treasury Board President Tony Clement – the man who spent $50 million in federal dollars to spruce up his riding for the 24-hour G-8 summit in 2010 – the trimming of Canada’s public service has been transformed into a ongoing 24-7 anti-government Whack-A-Mole.</p>
<p>Harper was accused of attacking environmentalists for obstructing resource development. But there’s more to it than that, Gutstein continues. “Eradicating scientific – and indeed, all centralized knowledge – by shuttering research stations and abandoning science laboratories is a more fundamental change,” he writes. “What’s unique here is the idea that environmental decisions should be based on market signals and not on accumulated scientific knowledge.”</p>
<p>Harper and his ever-loyal retinue of business think tanks enjoying instant access to almost every editorial page in the nation prefer to advocate a novel idea drummed up by the free market geeks: free-market environmentalism.</p>
<p>“What kind of Canada would that be,” Gutstein wonders.</p>
<p>Gutstein urges Canadians to think hard and long about their country when they consider its future under continued Harper rule.<br />
“If you focus only on Harper, you can learn a lot about his ruthless control over his party and caucus, his disciplined messaging, his obsessive focus on the economy, his ability to move issues forward in the light of vigorous opposition.”</p>
<p>And his steely determination to change Canada so profoundly that Canadians won’t be able to recognize, remember, or rebuild it as a healthy democracy.</p>
<p><em>Frances Russell was born in Winnipeg and graduated from the University of Manitoba with a Bachelor of Arts degree in history and political science. A journalist since 1962, she has covered and commented on politics in Manitoba, Ontario, B.C. and Ottawa, working for The Winnipeg Tribune, United Press International, The Globe and Mail, The Vancouver Sun and The Winnipeg Free Press as well as freelanced for The Toronto Star, The Edmonton Journal, CBC Radio and TV and Time Magazine.</em></p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/national-newswatch-canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Waterloo Region Record: Harperism: How Stephen Harper and his think-tank colleagues have transformed Canada</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/waterloo-region-record-harperism-how-stephen-harper-and-his-think-tank-colleagues-have-transformed-canada/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/waterloo-region-record-harperism-how-stephen-harper-and-his-think-tank-colleagues-have-transformed-canada/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:42:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=533</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jim Romahn, Waterloo Region Record, October 18, 2014, E4 Step by step, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is, according to author Donald Gutstein, turning Canada into a far-right economic and ultra-conservative social society. Gutstein says Harper is doing this by following the lead of think-tanks set up to &#8220;research&#8221; and promote these policies, think-tanks that are<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/waterloo-region-record-harperism-how-stephen-harper-and-his-think-tank-colleagues-have-transformed-canada/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jim Romahn, <em>Waterloo Region Record,</em> October 18, 2014, E4</p>
<p>Step by step, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is, according to author Donald Gutstein, turning Canada into a far-right economic and ultra-conservative social society.</p>
<p>Gutstein says Harper is doing this by following the lead of think-tanks set up to &#8220;research&#8221; and promote these policies, think-tanks that are funded by wealthy and powerful people. They also make excellent use of Canada&#8217;s leading news media organizations and columnists to give widespread public exposure to their proposals.</p>
<p>Harper&#8217;s economic policies are rooted in the philosophies of Friedrich Hayek and the members of the Mont Pelerin Society that Hayek co-founded, and the prime minister&#8217;s social policies are rooted in the writings of Leo Strauss, whose followers are called Straussists or neo-conservatives.</p>
<p>Gutstein makes a convincing case that Harper is devoted to these two philosophies &#8211; that he pursues principles rather than pragmatic and well-researched solutions, and that he is determined to so radically change Canada, it will be difficult to turn back.</p>
<p>For example, his government cuts taxes at every opportunity, starving the treasury so it can eliminate social programs, including foreign aid, services for refugees, labour unions and research and statistical data (i.e., from Statistics Canada) that might challenge the policies Harper wants to pursue, such as exploiting Canada&#8217;s oil and natural gas resources and increasing prison terms.</p>
<p>Gutstein says Harper is rewriting Canadian history by silencing references to peacekeeping and glorifying war, including the War of 1812 and the First World War. He cites the example of the rewritten booklet for immigrants and refugees, &#8220;Discover Canada,&#8221; and says it deals with Canadian history and culture in radically different ways than the booklet, &#8220;A Look at Canada,&#8221; which it replaces.</p>
<p>Whether you are or aren&#8217;t a Harper supporter, this is a book well worth reading before you cast your ballot in the 2015 federal election.</p>
<p><em>Jim Romahn is a Kitchener writer.</em></p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/waterloo-region-record-harperism-how-stephen-harper-and-his-think-tank-colleagues-have-transformed-canada/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Vancouver Sun: How Canada Made its Shift to the Right</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/vancouver-sun-how-canada-made-its-shift-to-the-right/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/vancouver-sun-how-canada-made-its-shift-to-the-right/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2014 17:29:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=527</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Tom Sandborn, Special to The Sun October 17, 2014 http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canada+made+shift+right/10298951/story.html#ixzz3HeA2cM32 Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think-tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada By Donald Gutstein James Lorimer &#38; Company Ltd. No one has ever accused Stephen Harper of being dizzyingly charismatic. Few enthuse about how charming he can be in small group settings, or how<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/vancouver-sun-how-canada-made-its-shift-to-the-right/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By Tom Sandborn, Special to The Sun October 17, 2014</p>
<p>http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canada+made+shift+right/10298951/story.html#ixzz3HeA2cM32</p>
<p>Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think-tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada<br />
By Donald Gutstein<br />
James Lorimer &amp; Company Ltd.</p>
<p>No one has ever accused Stephen Harper of being dizzyingly charismatic. Few enthuse about how charming he can be in small group settings, or how naturally he manages the person-to-person challenges of retail politics, such as kissing babies or flipping flapjacks at the Calgary Stampede.</p>
<p>And yet, while he’ll never be counted as one of Canada’s most charming politicians, Harper has been a remarkably successful leader, painting Ottawa’s House of Parliament Tory blue since 2006 and leading his party to Canada’s first majority government in over a decade in the 2011 election.</p>
<p>How does he do it? And what has Harper’s unlikely ascendancy done to Canada? Donald Gutstein, Simon Fraser University professor and media critic suggests some answers to these questions in his new book Harperism: How Stephen Harper and His Think-tank Colleagues Have Transformed Canada. (Full disclosure. Like many B.C. journalists, I have known Gutstein and his work for decades, and we occasionally share space in the online newspaper The Tyee.) For Gutstein, Harper is only one of the political beneficiaries, together with Margaret Thatcher, Brian Mulroney, Christy Clark and George W. Bush, to name a few, of a worldwide network of right wing, “free enterprise” think-tanks, a sophisticated propaganda machine that promotes business-friendly policies and politicians and attacks labour unions, inconvenient scientific findings (such as evidence of global warming/climate change) taxes and government attempts to redress long-standing economic and social inequities.</p>
<p>These think-tanks, Gutstein argues in his deeply researched, thoughtful and (mainly) even-handed book, have played a significant role in swaying public opinion and votes toward Harper, and in return have seen Harper-led governments take huge strides toward fulfilling the agenda (known as neo-liberalism) that informs their work — lower taxes, smaller government, weaker trade unions, an end to First Nations collective control of reserves in favour of individual private property, an end to environmental regulations that might reduce corporate profits and an effort to re-cast Canada as a Northern Rambo, a “warrior nation.” Neo-liberalism, Gutstein says, despite being often referred to as a conservative movement, is really an attempt not to conserve but to radically restructure existing social arrangements by creating more and more unregulated markets in every domain.</p>
<p>The Canadian-based members of this think-tank network (locally represented by the Fraser Institute, founded in Vancouver 40 years ago, when business interests here were alarmed by the reforms instituted by Dave Barrett’s NDP government and turned to the U.K.’s Antony Fisher, a frozen chicken mogul who has played a key role in forming such right-wing idea factories around the world, for startup funding and counsel) spend over $26 million a year to influence Canadian public opinion and voting patterns.</p>
<p>For Gutstein, the story starts with Friedrich von Hayek, the émigré Austrian economist who is widely recognized as one of the key intellectual voices in the triumphant, revanchist return of right wing political power in the developed world in the last half of the 20th century. Hayek played a key role in forming the Mont Pelerin Society in 1947, a body that Gutstein treats as the first right wing “neo-liberal” think-tank and the direct progenitor of the nearly 500 such organizations around the world. Harper based his graduate thesis at the University of Calgary on Hayek’s theories.</p>
<p>Harper, of course, was not the only one in Canada promoting Hayek’s enthusiasm for a return to an imagined golden age of free markets. As noted, t The Fraser Institute was founded here in 1974, joining a small group of already existing pro-business think tanks like the CD Howe Institute. By the 1990s, Gutstein says, a new cohort of right wing think-tanks began to appear across Canada, including Halifax’s Atlantic Institute for Market Studies in 1994, the Montreal Economic Institute in 1999 and Winnipeg’s Frontier Centre for Public Policy in the same year. More recently, gold mogul Peter Munk’s Aurea foundation (founded in 2006) has become an important funder for neo liberal think tanks. And in the Alberta heartland, says Gutstein, a neo liberal think-tank has been established within the University of Calgary in the form of the School for Public Policy in 2009.</p>
<p>All this expenditure (much of it subsidized in part by Canadian taxpayers, who underwrite the charitable tax deductible status claimed by corporate and high net-value individual donors to business friendly think-tanks in the country) has paid off in rightward policy changes and shifts in public opinion.</p>
<p>Gutstein argues that right wing think-tanks and their allies are made more influential by a mainstream media echo chamber. He says an examination of the 2013 Canadian Newsstand Major Dailies database shows that research from right wing sources like the Fraser Institute appears more often than papers released by left and progressive think-tanks like the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.</p>
<p>The tax-and-service-cutting gospel promoted by bodies like the Fraser Institute seems to have the compelling power of constant repetition and this may be one of the reasons, as this book suggests, that Harper and his colleagues have been as successful as they have been at changing the face of Canada.</p>
<p>There are a few regrettable lapses of tone in this book, introducing an unnecessarily strident element to what is otherwise a calmly delivered and damning account that needs no such extra volume. But these are rare, and do no real damage to the sensible and quintessentially reasonable and Canadian tone of most of the text. In balance, this is one of the most important books on Canadian politics published so far this year, and required reading for us all before we vote in the next federal election. Whether you are persuaded by Gutstein’s arguments or not, you owe it to yourself to grapple with them before you vote.</p>
<p>Tom Sandborn lives and writes in Vancouver. His home office has never been described as a think-tank. He welcomes feedback and story tips at tos65@telus.net.</p>
<p>© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/vancouver-sun-how-canada-made-its-shift-to-the-right/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harperism</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/harperism/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/harperism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Oct 2014 18:24:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jonny Miller]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Conservatives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Environment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gobal warming]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harperism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Integration with U.S.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Propaganda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Harper]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=490</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Margaret Thatcher transformed British political life forever. So did Ronald Reagan in the United States. Now Canada has experienced a similar, dramatic shift to a new kind of politics, which author Donald Gutstein terms Harperism. Among its key tenets: A weakened labour movement &#8211; and preferably the disappearance of unions &#8211; will contribute to Canada&#8217;s<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/harperism/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-476" src="http://donaldgutstein.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/harperism-cover-200x300.jpg" alt="harperism cover" width="200" height="300" /></p>
<p>Margaret Thatcher transformed British political life forever. So did Ronald Reagan in the United States. Now Canada has experienced a similar, dramatic shift to a new kind of politics, which author Donald Gutstein terms Harperism.</p>
<p><span id="more-490"></span></p>
<p>Among its key tenets:</p>
<ul>
<li>A weakened labour movement &#8211; and preferably the disappearance of unions &#8211; will contribute to Canada&#8217;s economic prosperity</li>
<li>Cutting back government scientific research and data collection will improve public policy-making</li>
</ul>
<p>These and other essential elements of Harperism flow from neo-liberal economic theories propounded by the Austrian economist Friedrich von Hayek and his U.S. disciples. They inspired Thatcherism and Reaganism. Stephen Harper has taken this neo-liberalism much further in many key areas.</p>
<p>The success of Harperism is no accident. Donald Gutstein documents the links between the politicians, think tanks, journalists, academics, and researchers who nurture and promote each other&#8217;s neo-liberal ideas.</p>
<div class="content_block" id="custom_post_widget-508"><h3>Harperism Reviews</h3>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://donaldgutstein.com/gutstein-reveals-extent-of-stephen-harper-revolution/">Georgia Straight &#8211; Gutstein reveals extent of Stephen Harper revolution in new book</a></li>
<li><a href="http://donaldgutstein.com/national-newswatch-canadians-need-to-take-their-country-back-before-its-gone/">National Newswatch &#8211; Canadians Need to Take Their Country Back Before It’s Gone</a></li>
<li><a href="http://donaldgutstein.com/waterloo-region-record-harperism-how-stephen-harper-and-his-think-tank-colleagues-have-transformed-canada/">Waterloo Region Record &#8211; Harperism: How Stephen Harper and his think-tank colleagues have transformed Canada</a></li>
<li><a href="http://donaldgutstein.com/vancouver-sun-how-canada-made-its-shift-to-the-right/">Vancouver Sun &#8211; How Canada Made its Shift to the Right</a></li>
</ul>

</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/harperism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New BC Think Tank&#8217;s Findings Remarkably Helpful to Clark</title>
		<link>https://donaldgutstein.com/new-bc-think-tanks-findings-remarkably-helpful-to-clark/</link>
		<comments>https://donaldgutstein.com/new-bc-think-tanks-findings-remarkably-helpful-to-clark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:01:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[B.C. politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Christy Clark government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate funding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Macdonald-Laurier Institute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resource Works]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donaldgutstein.com/?p=464</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Resource industry success benefit us all, Resource Works says. Some more than others, I say. Boost production in B.C.&#8217;s resource industries and we&#8217;ll all be better off &#8212; especially those of us in the Lower Mainland. That&#8217;s the soothing message emanating from the province&#8217;s newest corporate-sponsored think tank, Resource Works. It&#8217;s good news for all<a class="moretag" href="https://donaldgutstein.com/new-bc-think-tanks-findings-remarkably-helpful-to-clark/"> ...</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Resource industry success benefit us all, Resource Works says. Some more than others, I say.</strong></p>
<p>Boost production in B.C.&#8217;s resource industries and we&#8217;ll all be better off &#8212; especially those of us in the Lower Mainland.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s the soothing message emanating from the province&#8217;s newest corporate-sponsored think tank, Resource Works. It&#8217;s good news for all of us, and especially for the Christy Clark government, which has hitched its horse to the resource-development cart.</p>
<p>But is it true? Will we be better off with increased resource industry production rather than, say, increased tourism or technology development?</p>
<p>Such questions arise given the close links between Resource Works, the mining industry and the Clark government.</p>
<p>Resource Works was launched with a big splash in April. A <a href="http://www.resourceworks.com/seven-myths--cross.html">paper</a> produced for the fledgling think tank by Philip Cross, Statistics Canada&#8217;s former chief economic analyst, concludes that cities benefit the most from resource development because that&#8217;s where financial, business and even transportation services are located.</p>
<p>More resource-based jobs are created in the Lower Mainland than in the rest of the province, Cross&#8217;s study found.</p>
<p>This could be true. Think of all those Lower Mainland-based lawyers, lobbyists, insurance executives, financiers and PR flaks needed to protect Imperial Metals from the damage wreaked by its devastating Mount Polley tailings pond collapse. Then think of the baristas to serve their coffee and the foreign nannies to look after their kids. And so on.</p>
<p><strong>Development good, but compared to what?</strong></p>
<p>To launch his study, Cross and advisory council chair Lyn Anglin met with the Vancouver Sun and Province editorial boards on a Wednesday. The next day both papers published uncritical accounts. (See <a href="http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Cayo+Vancouver+biggest+winner+when+forests+farms+mines+well/9720865/story.html">here </a>and <a href="http://www.theprovince.com/business/Resource+development+creates+more+spinoff+jobs+than+primary+industry+experts/9720732/story.html">here</a>.) The Globe and Mail <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouver-has-the-most-to-gain-from-lng-analyst-says/article17929050/">followed </a>in similar fashion the next day.</p>
<p>All three papers presented the same message: most jobs created by resource development are in Greater Vancouver. And Resource Works is not an advocacy organization, but one dedicated to providing research to help the public make sound resource-industry decisions.</p>
<p>The organization&#8217;s ability to command such positive media attention may be related to the fact that executive director Stewart Muir was the Vancouver Sun&#8217;s deputy managing editor for nearly 14 years.</p>
<p>But something is missing from Philip Cross&#8217;s research. Resource development may be good, but compared to what? Cross should have compared resource to other economic development. Does resource development create more jobs than tourism, high tech or some other sector? Perhaps we don&#8217;t need more mines, liquefied natural gas plants and pipelines because we can focus on more environmentally sustainable green alternatives.</p>
<p>By omitting information that would provide a meaningful comparison, Cross created a misleading study &#8212; the kind of study Resource Works, the mining industry and the Clark government evidently need.</p>
<p><strong>Who&#8217;s involved?</strong></p>
<p>Perhaps it&#8217;s worth probing the relationship between the three.</p>
<p>Stewart Muir has been in the <a href="http://harveyoberfeld.ca/blog/muir-case-says-a-lot-about-bc-governance/">news </a>before because of his close connections to Christy Clark. He&#8217;s married to Athana Mentzelopoulos, who&#8217;s now deputy minister of jobs, tourism and skills training, and before that was in charge of Clark&#8217;s &#8220;priority&#8221; files. She&#8217;s so close to Clark she was bridesmaid at Clark&#8217;s wedding.</p>
<p>In 2011, Muir was<a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/hiring-husband-of-clark-aide-an-honest-mistake/article4252087/"> awarded</a> a $141,000-a-year contract for the job of vice-president of communication at Vancouver Island Health Authority. The job wasn&#8217;t posted and tenders were not called. When the news broke, the contract was withdrawn. Now Muir is heading Resource Works.</p>
<p>Another link to the Clark government is provided by Resource Works director Geoff Plant. Plant was attorney general under Gordon Campbell and was appointed by Clark in 2012 as the government&#8217;s chief legal strategist for the Northern Gateway Pipeline Joint Review Panel proceedings &#8212; resource development writ large. His expertise is aboriginal law, crucial territory for Clark&#8217;s resource-exploitation agenda.</p>
<p>Resource Works&#8217; links to mining are just as strong.</p>
<p>Board chair Doug Horswill is a senior vice-president at Teck Resources, B.C.&#8217;s mining giant. Before his stint at Teck, Horswill served as B.C.&#8217;s deputy minister of energy, mines and petroleum resources. And before that he worked at mining companies Utah International and Inco. It&#8217;s B.C.&#8217;s version of the revolving door syndrome.</p>
<p>Advisory Council chair Lyn Anglin is the former president and CEO of Geoscience BC, a provincially-funded body whose mandate is to attract mineral and oil and gas investment to the province. Resource Works research could certainly assist this mission.</p>
<p>As to who is funding the research, the organization did volunteer the information that seed funding came from the B.C. Business Council, but did not disclose other sources of funding.</p>
<p><strong>Media give up the mic</strong></p>
<p>No media outlets followed up on these connections. Instead, Resource Works <a href="http://http://www.resourceworks.com/resource-stories---a-partnership-with-the-province-newspaper.html">teamed up </a>with the Province newspaper to produce a weekly feature on how important trade, industry and resource development are to the B.C. economy (paid for by whom?).</p>
<p>The paper gave Muir a podium to <a href="http://http://blogs.theprovince.com/2014/05/18/stewart-muir-want-health-care-better-get-behind-b-c-s-lng-plans/">argue </a>that we can&#8217;t have health care without LNG development. And it gave a similar <a href="http://http://blogs.theprovince.com/2014/06/01/dan-miller-how-will-we-pay-for-stuff-without-the-resource-sector/">podium</a> to Resource Works adviser Dan Miller two weeks later. Miller, a former Prince Rupert NDP MLA who was briefly premier as the New Democrats imploded in 2000, is a long-time resource industry evangelist and a consultant with PR powerhouse National Public Relations, which has Enbridge as a client.</p>
<p>Miller argues that Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson won&#8217;t get his Broadway transit line and the BC Teachers&#8217; Federation won&#8217;t get pay raises without increased coal exports.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s an effective message. We can&#8217;t retain our standard of living without the pipelines, tanker traffic, LNG plants, mining developments and coal export projects that are in the works.</p>
<p>Repeat the message often enough and we&#8217;ll soon start believing it. Or if we don&#8217;t believe it, we&#8217;ll at least accept it as legitimate political discourse. And Christy Clark can get on with the business of re-election.</p>
<p>First published in The Tyee</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>

]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://donaldgutstein.com/new-bc-think-tanks-findings-remarkably-helpful-to-clark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
